# Market Thesis Research Bundle

Question: Given the stablecoin backlash from community banks, will Congress or regulators materially narrow issuer incentives, rewards, or yield-linked features before the stablecoin framework is fully implemented?

What this bundle is: a reasoning and monitoring scaffold. It organizes public evidence into observations, claims, uncertainty branches, thresholds, and a watch plan.

What this bundle is not: primary evidence, live market data, trade advice, or a substitute for official, live, or current web sources.

Core tension: Given the stablecoin backlash from community banks, will Congress or regulators materially narrow issuer incentives, rewards, or yield-linked features before the stablecoin framework is fully implemented?

Current inference to verify: {'direction': 'unlikely', 'probability': 0.33, 'confidence': 'medium', 'status': 'inference_to_verify', 'summary': 'The enacted framework already blocks issuer-paid interest, but the contested platform-level rewards / yield workaround still appears open in the latest reported compromise text. Based on the reviewed sources, I do not see a finalized legislative or regulatory action by cutoff that materially closes that gap before full implementation.', 'notes': ['This is an inference, not a prediction signal.', 'The question turns on whether third-party rewards, affiliate programs, or platform pass-through incentives get narrowed beyond the existing issuer-interest ban.', 'The strongest near-term path to a change would be implementing guidance or a late-stage legislative rider; neither was finalized in the reviewed material.']} Treat this as a hypothesis that must be refreshed against live official sources, not as a signal.

How to use: read `source_priority.json` first, refresh sources in `live_verification_plan.json`, then use `fact_inference_split.json`, `thresholds.json`, and `watch_schedule.json` to decide what changed. Do not infer buy/sell/hold, position sizing, execution, or asset-price direction from this artifact.